|
|
|
|
|
by paxys
1558 days ago
|
|
Everyone wonders why there's no widely used alternative to Chrome, then someone makes a great one (Firefox) and nobody is happy. In reality, there are two categories of users – one group (the vast majority) is perfectly happy with the status quo regardless of privacy issues or anything else, and the other is simply looking to endlessly nitpick and complain about everything in pursuit of some hypothetical perfection that can never be reached. There's no wonder then that new products will mostly cater to the first group than the second. |
|
Supporting the management status quo is the opposite of supporting the product status quo; Firefox now is an absolutely unrecognizable product compared to Firefox 5 years ago. Not coincidentally, Chrome isn't unrecognizable, it's dependable. I wonder why it's successful? Is it because google isn't playing fairly, or because anyone who has ever been satisfied with Chrome has never been given any good reason to leave, while every change in firefox seems tuned to peel off 2% of the userbase?
If there's an effective way Google isn't playing fair, it's probably that they have some indirect but strong influence in directing Firefox development.